this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2024
22 points (100.0% liked)

Ask Lemmy

27036 readers
1048 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

What are CPU designs which are not fetch/store but operate directly on RAM?

I only know about the design of the Nintendo Entertainment System (NES), where the CPU does not have registers (AFAIK) and operates directly on RAM, with fast access to low addresses in the RAM.

What CPUs/Systems do you know, which also do not do fetch/store for their operands? Which systems are out there? Why do CPUs like RISC/Arm/AMD64 use fetch/store, what are the tradeoffs? Are there different architectures for CPUs working on operands outside of fetch/store, DMA and stack machines?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

As far as I know the 6502 clone in the NES has 3 general-purpose registers: X, Y and accumulator. Many of the instructions operate on them.

https://www.masswerk.at/6502/6502_instruction_set.html

It's a good question though. I am just not aware of a mainstream CPU architecture without registers.

[–] wolf 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Thank you very much for your answer! :-)

I would also assume, that at least 1-3 registers are 'always' in a CPU, like instruction pointer, top of stack for stack machines or for modern CPUs frame pointers.

For the NES, as far as I understand, you can also operate on the lower memory addresses with the CPU by simply referring to their address.

In the end, what triggered my question is the (banal) insight, that one actually does not need registers from computer science point of view and I am wondering if there are any implementations.

(Obviously for speed reasons alone one wants registers...)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Interesting question, a lot of CPUs have instructions that act directly on memory, but not having any registers would be a weird kind of system. You could design one for yourself en run it on an FPGA, but it probably wouldn't work very well. At the very least you would want to have an instruction pointer and accumulation registers.

[–] wolf 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Just to be more specific, from your link the operations with operands from low registers "zpg zeropage OPC $LL operand is zeropage address (hi-byte is zero, address = $00LL)" looks like exactly the stuff I am interested in. It seems to me, that they are like 256 (slower) pseudo registers.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Ah, I see what you mean now. Yeah I'm guessing there are code sequences where it's more efficient (either in clocks or code size or simple convenience) to operate on these 256 low addresses than repeating load/hit/store.